Misrepresenting Halliday (1977/78) And Halliday (1973)

Fawcett (2010: 55):

For very many years the major new component of the second possible model of language was represented in Halliday's writings solely by the use of the term "semantics" as a placeholder in his summaries of what a language is like (e.g., in Halliday 1977/78:128). His nearest related work in this period was on the development, with Bernstein and Turner, of the concept of "socio-semantic" system networks (e.g., Halliday 1973:48-102) — but these only applied in very specific contexts of situation and consequently did not constitute a generalised semantics, as I pointed out in Fawcett (1975).

Blogger Comments:

[1] This is misleading.  What Fawcett dismisses as a mere "placeholder" is elaborated by Halliday (1978: 128) as follows:

[2] This is very misleading, because the wording 'as I pointed out in Fawcett (1975)' gives the false impression that Fawcett uncovered something unacknowledged in Halliday (1973). The initial context of language use under consideration in Halliday (1973) was announced at the beginning of the article and clarified as such with regard to his first semantic network (Figure 1), and its later developments (Figures 2 & 3). Halliday (1973/2003: 324-5, 328-9):

Let us take as an example the use of language by a mother for the purpose of controlling the behaviour of a child. …
Figure 1 is a first attempt at a semantic network for this context. …
Figure 2 More generalised version of earlier network …
Figure 3 Revised version of Figure 1 …

Subsequent semantic networks for other specific contexts are similarly qualified (op. cit.: 332-3, 335, 337-41):

Figure 4 Network for move in pontoon …
Figure 5 Pontoon move network showing recursive option …
Figure 6 Revised version of Figure 5 …
Figure 7 System network for greeting …
Figure 8 Network for agency in physical threat …
Figure 9 Network for physical threat …
Figure 10 Non-physical threat …
Figure 11 Network for warning …
Figure 12 Revised network for threats and warnings …